Is it that you have the impression that your group is the only group that understands the concept of launching? This comes from the ground. Could you explain how slowing the arm down increases power for us lower downs.
Sean
Sean
OP
rmcrobertson
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #82
Huh. Ask some questions, be polite about it, get told you're, "an ***," get told, "he's probably not so bold in person," get a fair amount of overly-inflated language such as, "one can harness the forces," or, "If speed is a dead end street for you, the chances are higher of being dead on the street if your opponent is quicker then you."
Do I have a bit of an axe to grind? Sure. I was sufficiently annoyed by the previous comments on you-know-who's Tip that I wanted to see what would happen if I made some of the same comments about other martial artists' video clips.
Of course, I was considerably more polite than the originals--and I repeatedly noted that the questions might just be coming from me, or they might be a byproduct of the fact that they were on video, or they might be something I didn't understand, or they might represent a difference in basic theory, but well, I guess I have the answer to that question.
I appreciate differences. I appreciate discussion, and I appreciate criticism, having as I do a professional stake in them. I also understand what's going on when I see intellectual double standards, when I see cant phrases substituted for analyses, when I see personal attacks in the place of simple discussion.
Just so's you know, and can make fun more easily, I wasn't taught in kenpo to develop "speed," as something in and of itself. Nor do I teach that way. Perceptual speed, sure. Closing the gap, sure. Getting the hell out of the way, sure. Rounding off corners, sure. Trimming away excess in one's movement, sure. Employing different muscle groups, sure. Working for better form, sure. "Tricks," like rebounding of the floor or off an opponent or off one's own body, sure. Other such things, sure. But most of this got worked through teaching, say, good kata; or, running things hard in a technique line. I don't agree--it's a disagreement, nothing more--with developing speed in and of itself.
By the way, the particle/wave analogy was eminently appropriate. It has to do with different points of view with regard to the same phenomenon...
Which is very much what's at stake here. Not anybody's character, or brainpower, or instructor, or bravery, or whatever seems to need to come up as an issue in these little discussions. Looks to me like you're getting so pissed at me in part because you assume I must be thinking--and writing--what you are in fact writing. Just so you know, my ground assumption is (and has always been) that folks like Mr. Ence know (and can enact) a helluva lot more about this kenpo stuff than I do.
Just explain--and, my suggestion is, go back through the posts by "Touch," and "Yahoo," and others, including myself, response to the Tips (a thread we're still on, yes?) and ask yourself if they match your standards for courtesy and for good discussion. Then ask if you're leaning on a double standard. And be of good cheer--originally, I was going to simply start quoting the previous comments, directed against the recent videos, but I decided that would be unnecessarily sneaky and unreasonable.
Time--well past time--to de-escalate the rhetoric, don't you think? All we gots to do is explain what we think, have experienced, learned. For example, I didn't pretend to know what you mean by the term, "orbital summation," so why not just explain it? Then I'll understand, especially since it probably is simply another term for something I do already know, and we can go on to other matters.
Do I have a bit of an axe to grind? Sure. I was sufficiently annoyed by the previous comments on you-know-who's Tip that I wanted to see what would happen if I made some of the same comments about other martial artists' video clips.
Of course, I was considerably more polite than the originals--and I repeatedly noted that the questions might just be coming from me, or they might be a byproduct of the fact that they were on video, or they might be something I didn't understand, or they might represent a difference in basic theory, but well, I guess I have the answer to that question.
I appreciate differences. I appreciate discussion, and I appreciate criticism, having as I do a professional stake in them. I also understand what's going on when I see intellectual double standards, when I see cant phrases substituted for analyses, when I see personal attacks in the place of simple discussion.
Just so's you know, and can make fun more easily, I wasn't taught in kenpo to develop "speed," as something in and of itself. Nor do I teach that way. Perceptual speed, sure. Closing the gap, sure. Getting the hell out of the way, sure. Rounding off corners, sure. Trimming away excess in one's movement, sure. Employing different muscle groups, sure. Working for better form, sure. "Tricks," like rebounding of the floor or off an opponent or off one's own body, sure. Other such things, sure. But most of this got worked through teaching, say, good kata; or, running things hard in a technique line. I don't agree--it's a disagreement, nothing more--with developing speed in and of itself.
By the way, the particle/wave analogy was eminently appropriate. It has to do with different points of view with regard to the same phenomenon...
Which is very much what's at stake here. Not anybody's character, or brainpower, or instructor, or bravery, or whatever seems to need to come up as an issue in these little discussions. Looks to me like you're getting so pissed at me in part because you assume I must be thinking--and writing--what you are in fact writing. Just so you know, my ground assumption is (and has always been) that folks like Mr. Ence know (and can enact) a helluva lot more about this kenpo stuff than I do.
Just explain--and, my suggestion is, go back through the posts by "Touch," and "Yahoo," and others, including myself, response to the Tips (a thread we're still on, yes?) and ask yourself if they match your standards for courtesy and for good discussion. Then ask if you're leaning on a double standard. And be of good cheer--originally, I was going to simply start quoting the previous comments, directed against the recent videos, but I decided that would be unnecessarily sneaky and unreasonable.
Time--well past time--to de-escalate the rhetoric, don't you think? All we gots to do is explain what we think, have experienced, learned. For example, I didn't pretend to know what you mean by the term, "orbital summation," so why not just explain it? Then I'll understand, especially since it probably is simply another term for something I do already know, and we can go on to other matters.
So are you suggesting that those whom work twitch response muscles as opposed to muscles for strenghth are wasting there time? Is the whole science a wash because speed comes from the ground? Repeating a form over and over only creates a habbit in the way you do the form. Trying to do the form differently and seeking insights as to how it can be done better is the only way your ever going to improve. Mr. Tatum boldly claimed we should all know some tech by now. That was a message to us all thet if we didn't know it we were in the wrong school there Robert. Or was that just an innocent off the cuff extempor remark? You now suggest that people should slow the weapon down for increased power and I was wondering if you could explain how that works. Inquiring minds want to know
Sorry Robert I do not feel sorry for you and the way you are treated on the forums. Since you have an axe to agrind then you can expect folks to treat you poorly. The problem is that you have directed your "axe to grind" toward a group that had nothing to do with critique of Tatum's TOW.
Your right however that is time to stop the rehotric and the play on words.
Id be interested in seeing you on video to understand what
your talking about. Would you be willing to do this???? Would
you be willing to let everyone see what you do on video???
?????
OP
rmcrobertson
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #85
"That was a message to all of us....?"
No, but if you study the alignment of his left arm in regard to the dragon wall hanging in the background you will see the formation of the "high noon," position on the clock, a message to all earthlings that the invasion from a watery planet in the Draco constellation is due next Thursday at 11:58 AM Pacific Standard Time.
Sean, I've no idea what you're talking about. Because I simply didn't say any of this stuff; among other things, I wrote absolutely nothing suggesting that anybody was, "wasting their time." I'm afraid that's your fantasy, not mine.
Incidentally, there are only "fast twitch," and "slow twitch," muscles, as far as I know. What you would develop with them would have to do with matters such as purpose, anatomical position, cross-section, attachment, etc.
In response to the question about video--I look like an idiot on videos. Which I've noted about three times already. And nobody asked for anybody to feel sorry for me. That's your fantasy, not mine. I asked for decent manners and honest discussion.
Oh yes...as far as where I've directed my little darts, well, a) I'm aiming at the issue of polite treatment of everybody's instructors and schools, and b) you might wanta reconsider "Kenpo Yahoos," remarks apropos of Mr. Tatum. They're right on this thread.
No, but if you study the alignment of his left arm in regard to the dragon wall hanging in the background you will see the formation of the "high noon," position on the clock, a message to all earthlings that the invasion from a watery planet in the Draco constellation is due next Thursday at 11:58 AM Pacific Standard Time.
Sean, I've no idea what you're talking about. Because I simply didn't say any of this stuff; among other things, I wrote absolutely nothing suggesting that anybody was, "wasting their time." I'm afraid that's your fantasy, not mine.
Incidentally, there are only "fast twitch," and "slow twitch," muscles, as far as I know. What you would develop with them would have to do with matters such as purpose, anatomical position, cross-section, attachment, etc.
In response to the question about video--I look like an idiot on videos. Which I've noted about three times already. And nobody asked for anybody to feel sorry for me. That's your fantasy, not mine. I asked for decent manners and honest discussion.
Oh yes...as far as where I've directed my little darts, well, a) I'm aiming at the issue of polite treatment of everybody's instructors and schools, and b) you might wanta reconsider "Kenpo Yahoos," remarks apropos of Mr. Tatum. They're right on this thread.
Take a look at a boxer such as Mike Tyson. Now that is a perfect example of someone who has awesome speed as well as power, and I dont see him slowing down when he punches. Dont you think that the same ideas and concepts can be applied to Kenpo?
Mike
Mike
OP
rmcrobertson
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #87
Of course, Mike. I also note, however, that he's dropping in his stances when he hits....
I don't care if he is washed up as a pro boxer, which is a pity. I ain't getting into any quarrels with the guy...
I don't care if he is washed up as a pro boxer, which is a pity. I ain't getting into any quarrels with the guy...
OP
Kenpo Yahoo
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #88
Hey Robert go ahead and quote me anytime you would like. I stand behind everything I've said.
Uh.... if you claim that Mr. Ence knows more about this, which he was obviously taught by Mr. Mills, then why wouldn't the other instructors under Mr. Mills understand and/or teach the same material. Which by your own admission you don't understand as well as they do.
Uh... actually you did pretend to know what it meant. See the next statement.
As I stated before, you obviously don't understand the term otherwise you wouldn't have made this statement.
What else you got.
Uh.... if you claim that Mr. Ence knows more about this, which he was obviously taught by Mr. Mills, then why wouldn't the other instructors under Mr. Mills understand and/or teach the same material. Which by your own admission you don't understand as well as they do.
Uh... actually you did pretend to know what it meant. See the next statement.
As I stated before, you obviously don't understand the term otherwise you wouldn't have made this statement.
What else you got.
Stop the rehotric.
I beginning to think that you are all words and I am asking a simple task.
Again Id be interested in seeing you on video to understand everything that your saying. Can you back up your words on a video to show everyone on the forums???
I dont understand why you look bad on video, if your using proper mechanics like your speaking, you should look fine.
?????
LET IT GO!!!
Question:
Orbital Summation: Logically this seems to refer to the confluence of factors (rotation, body momentum, Mar. of Grav, etc.) which when taken together, is the "sum" of that strike. When talking "Orbital" I am assuming that your are not talking about linear movement, but either circular or enlongated circles or strikes.
Given the context, it appears you ar talking about a synergistic end result, in which the end result (power, speed, force) is greater than the sum of it's parts. For example creating and factoring in Borrowed Force or using rebounding or launching to increase the resistance before the relaxed weapon makes contact. I was also wondering about taking out the "stops" and "starts", something I and others under Mr. Sepulveda have been working on for my own edification.
I am not attacking, or putting words in anyone's mouth, but I want to know the reference if you are going to use it and do not mind sharing it? So far you have not, and that is your perogative, but please reference it back to something we can identify with.
Thanks,
-Michael
Question:
Orbital Summation: Logically this seems to refer to the confluence of factors (rotation, body momentum, Mar. of Grav, etc.) which when taken together, is the "sum" of that strike. When talking "Orbital" I am assuming that your are not talking about linear movement, but either circular or enlongated circles or strikes.
Given the context, it appears you ar talking about a synergistic end result, in which the end result (power, speed, force) is greater than the sum of it's parts. For example creating and factoring in Borrowed Force or using rebounding or launching to increase the resistance before the relaxed weapon makes contact. I was also wondering about taking out the "stops" and "starts", something I and others under Mr. Sepulveda have been working on for my own edification.
I am not attacking, or putting words in anyone's mouth, but I want to know the reference if you are going to use it and do not mind sharing it? So far you have not, and that is your perogative, but please reference it back to something we can identify with.
Thanks,
-Michael
Muscles have both in them. The difference is in the proportion to each other in each muscle.
Most triceps have a fairly high proportion of fast twitch fibers, while the latissimus dorsai, will not. You could optimize what you have, but you don't just grow more.
-Michael
Most triceps have a fairly high proportion of fast twitch fibers, while the latissimus dorsai, will not. You could optimize what you have, but you don't just grow more.
-Michael
That is very interesting. We train for fast twitch; however, I had not thought about building those muscles. I guess that is a good thing. On the "knuckles to punch with" thread they are discussing how these practices might damage your knuckles. Coincidently I just had a class today with my instructor, Skip, on the practice of not locking out your moves for the purpose of eliminating any push what so ever. This will also increase your speed, but you have to go back through all of your techs to see where you might be doing that.
Sean
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2002
- Messages
- 8,069
- Reaction score
- 25
The next personal attack I see will see that thread locked, permanently. The parties involved will also be given "Official Warning."
Seig
MT Admin Team
Seig
MT Admin Team
I think what the problem is here, is that everybody has there own version. There are people from the Tatum branch and the Mills branch. 2 different teachers, 2 different outlooks. Does that make either of them wrong? NO.
Lets get back to the topic.
Mike
Lets get back to the topic.
Mike
No, Sophisticated basics are "singular in action with multiple results" period. A "compound strike" on the other hand is what your talking about, or you could call it residual motion. (depending on the application). The TOW reality is extrapolated (sp?) from the technique "fallen cross" (knee to the elbows and immediately kick to the knee (pick a kick?)). This technique (TOW) is simply grafting two tech's "snaking talon" and "fallen cross" and is really only employing "compound strikes". Sorry!Maltair said:
:asian:
OP
rmcrobertson
Guest
- Thread Starter
- #96
Axly, even more sorry, it's a sophisticated basic.
If you don't mind my saying, you might want to review either Mr. Parker's and Tom Gow's 1950s pamphlet, or the second volume of, "Infinite Insights;" a basic front kick is taught so that the knee comes up into "chambered," position before the lower leg and foot are extended.
In this case, the basic chambering action has been used not only to shape the foot into the proper weapon and develop power and balance in the kick, but to attack an elbow, together with the hands, en route to delivering the ball kick. One action, multiple uses.
Certainly, "Fallen Cross," and (to some extent) "Snaking Talon," have this particular move in them. That is because both techniques represent the employment of a, "sophisticated basic." Moreover, I suspect that, "compound strikes," are themselves examples of a sophisticated basic.
If you don't mind my saying, you might want to review either Mr. Parker's and Tom Gow's 1950s pamphlet, or the second volume of, "Infinite Insights;" a basic front kick is taught so that the knee comes up into "chambered," position before the lower leg and foot are extended.
In this case, the basic chambering action has been used not only to shape the foot into the proper weapon and develop power and balance in the kick, but to attack an elbow, together with the hands, en route to delivering the ball kick. One action, multiple uses.
Certainly, "Fallen Cross," and (to some extent) "Snaking Talon," have this particular move in them. That is because both techniques represent the employment of a, "sophisticated basic." Moreover, I suspect that, "compound strikes," are themselves examples of a sophisticated basic.
rmcrobertson said:
I should have clarified that I have for myself and students made a determination and differentiate between "sophisticated basics" and "compound strikes". All though traditionally they are clumped together and used universally as the same thing.
Keep fighting the good fight!
